Guess what, if you think you've been DoSed illegally, you can sue them. Just be prepared to demonstrate how much money you've lost due to the attack, and you'll get it in court, assuming you weren't actually sharing copyrighted material to begin with. It worked with fax machines. People don't FAX spam very often anymore because they know they can be sued for the cost of paper and toner.
So you want govt. to tell people how to do business now? The day that happens, I'm going to find a new place to live. The anticompetitive legislation is bad enough. It's their material. If they don't want to sell it to you online, you can't make them.
If someone told you you couldn't shoot someone who broke into your house because that made you a vigilante, your opinion would change pretty quickly, I'm sure. This wouldn't be the first law allowing someone to take matters into his own hands in protecting his property
If a cure is possible and you don't develop it, your competitor will, making your symptom treating drug worth $0 and putting you out of business. There is incentive to find a cure rather than treating symptoms
The problem with your arguement is that if they make the $1 pill, company B will come along with the $100 pill and their $1 pill will be worth $0. Companies improve their products to avoid being beaten by competitors. That's why capitalism works so well
So what do Mac users do when Blockbuster lets you download movies using DRM formats that expire in a week. It won't work on a Mac, so mac users will need to keep driving to the video store while pc users will be able to rent and download movies from their own homes. I guess Apple expects their users to get the movies for free using p2p.
Why don't you go raise a billion dollars to develop a new drug and see how much money you lose when you have no patent protection and 10 drug companies reverse engineer it the day it hits the market and sell it for a tenth of what you wanted to charge to break even in 10 years.
Remember that just because the law says you have the right to copy something for fair use, doesn't mean the MPAA has to make it easy for you. Because piracy is threatening a billion dollar industry, blockbuster alone will make sure future stuff is released in an uncopyable format. It'll be the same type of war DirectTV is fighting with the smart card hackers.
Why would anyone buy his CD if they already have it on mp3? Maybe now they will because their computer isn't hooked up to their stereo system, but in the future there will be no motivation to buy cds if you have all the tracks on mp3.
A 900 MHz Crusoe has terrible performance. I could build a hell of a lot better system for $1600. This system would be useful for a longer period of time, and therefore, on average, use up less landfill space. Thus, this NEC pc is NOT environmentally friendly.
I hope you're being sarcastic about innovative Apple hardware, because, they're behind for the most part in all areas. That's why they're buying third party pc hardware. Of course, no company in their right mind would volunteer to design harware for macs. If Apple doesn't want it, they'll make sure no one can put it in their machines. Remember Exponential? Not only did Apple breech their contract with Exponential, but they wouldn't allow the clone makers at the time to modify the BIOS to boot using the Exponential PPC. They're tactics make MS look like nice guys.
No one put a gun to your head and forced you to buy cds for $16. If you don't like the price, don't buy it. This govt. regulation bs isn't going to solve anything. Price fixing isn't a real issue anyway since only one label can produce a cd by a particular artist. Therefore, there is no competition, so there is no need for price fixing.
"M$ is a monopoly not because they own the lions share (~95%) of the PC market, they are a monopoly because of what they do, and how they hold onto that share." By that definition, Apple and Sun are much bigger monopolies than MS.
When OSX is available on pc hardware, I'll take a look at it. I refuse to buy an OS from a company that is the only source for the hardware. It's an innovation killer. Sun has the same business practice and look how overpriced their hardware is. My company is switching from solaris to linux as soon as the CAD tools are available under linux. When I put together my pc, I picked the processor, motherboard, etc. that I wanted, not the stuff that MS, Apple or any other vendor decided I should have.
Without patents there would be no research into new drugs, and therefore, a far greater loss of life. You can't afford to spend a decade and a millions of dollars on research without some protection against reverse engineering by your competitors.
Netscape used the same strategy to gain market share. They gave it away for free until they built up a market. Then they started charging a registration fee to all non-educational users. After IE came along, they couldn't charge anything anymore. I guess everyone hear's hoping Linux will do the same thing to Windows, i.e. make the value in dollars of an OS approach $0.
You do get something when you buy a creative card and download the latest media player. You get the ability to play a DRM file. Everybody kept saying they'd pay for mp3's if they were made available for a low cost. This technology makes it possible while providing some protection against p2p sharing. If you never buy a DRM file, you won't even notice that your sound card doesn't output digital audio when you play it. If you don't like DRM songs, don't buy them.
"What we need to concentrate on is defeating the laws that will ban non DRM media players." What laws are those? That doesn't even make sense. Either a file uses DRM, and you need DRM player, or it doesn't, and you can use whatever's available. It's obvious what you really want is no legislation banning ripping software.
It's bad enough when the person posting a story puts a biased spin on it in his commentary, but when slashdot allows biased stoires like this to qualify as "news", they need to start examining what they really want this site to be. Apparently, they don't want to present unbiased information, and let the slashdot community decide for themselves what it means through opinions and discussion, but instead prefer to push their agenda on slashdot community.
Your solution for the RIAA is like telling Walmart they should discourage shoplifting by handing out coupons for free stuff at McDonalds to people when they purchase products. Sure it may make a small dent in shoplifting, but it doesn't make shoplifting morally right. The added value to the purchasers at Walmart is ultimately paid by them anyway, assuming Walmart's making a profit. Therefore, they're paying extra to discourage shoplifters. Doesn't sound like a very fair solution to me.
Slashdot Mirror
Guess what, if you think you've been DoSed illegally, you can sue them. Just be prepared to demonstrate how much money you've lost due to the attack, and you'll get it in court, assuming you weren't actually sharing copyrighted material to begin with. It worked with fax machines. People don't FAX spam very often anymore because they know they can be sued for the cost of paper and toner.
So you want govt. to tell people how to do business now? The day that happens, I'm going to find a new place to live. The anticompetitive legislation is bad enough. It's their material. If they don't want to sell it to you online, you can't make them.
If someone told you you couldn't shoot someone who broke into your house because that made you a vigilante, your opinion would change pretty quickly, I'm sure. This wouldn't be the first law allowing someone to take matters into his own hands in protecting his property
If a cure is possible and you don't develop it, your competitor will, making your symptom treating drug worth $0 and putting you out of business. There is incentive to find a cure rather than treating symptoms
The problem with your arguement is that if they make the $1 pill, company B will come along with the $100 pill and their $1 pill will be worth $0. Companies improve their products to avoid being beaten by competitors. That's why capitalism works so well
So what do Mac users do when Blockbuster lets you download movies using DRM formats that expire in a week. It won't work on a Mac, so mac users will need to keep driving to the video store while pc users will be able to rent and download movies from their own homes. I guess Apple expects their users to get the movies for free using p2p.
How many pharmacologists do you know that work for free?
Why don't you go raise a billion dollars to develop a new drug and see how much money you lose when you have no patent protection and 10 drug companies reverse engineer it the day it hits the market and sell it for a tenth of what you wanted to charge to break even in 10 years.
Remember that just because the law says you have the right to copy something for fair use, doesn't mean the MPAA has to make it easy for you. Because piracy is threatening a billion dollar industry, blockbuster alone will make sure future stuff is released in an uncopyable format. It'll be the same type of war DirectTV is fighting with the smart card hackers.
Why would anyone buy his CD if they already have it on mp3? Maybe now they will because their computer isn't hooked up to their stereo system, but in the future there will be no motivation to buy cds if you have all the tracks on mp3.
A 900 MHz Crusoe has terrible performance. I could build a hell of a lot better system for $1600. This system would be useful for a longer period of time, and therefore, on average, use up less landfill space. Thus, this NEC pc is NOT environmentally friendly.
I hope you're being sarcastic about innovative Apple hardware, because, they're behind for the most part in all areas. That's why they're buying third party pc hardware. Of course, no company in their right mind would volunteer to design harware for macs. If Apple doesn't want it, they'll make sure no one can put it in their machines. Remember Exponential? Not only did Apple breech their contract with Exponential, but they wouldn't allow the clone makers at the time to modify the BIOS to boot using the Exponential PPC. They're tactics make MS look like nice guys.
No one put a gun to your head and forced you to buy cds for $16. If you don't like the price, don't buy it. This govt. regulation bs isn't going to solve anything. Price fixing isn't a real issue anyway since only one label can produce a cd by a particular artist. Therefore, there is no competition, so there is no need for price fixing.
Why not just download Winamp for free, rather than switching to a Mac system that's overpriced and used by 5% of the pop.
"M$ is a monopoly not because they own the lions share (~95%) of the PC market, they are a monopoly because of what they do, and how they hold onto that share." By that definition, Apple and Sun are much bigger monopolies than MS.
And open source code doesn't have security holes?
Sounds like the open source community tactics.
When OSX is available on pc hardware, I'll take a look at it. I refuse to buy an OS from a company that is the only source for the hardware. It's an innovation killer. Sun has the same business practice and look how overpriced their hardware is. My company is switching from solaris to linux as soon as the CAD tools are available under linux. When I put together my pc, I picked the processor, motherboard, etc. that I wanted, not the stuff that MS, Apple or any other vendor decided I should have.
Without patents there would be no research into new drugs, and therefore, a far greater loss of life. You can't afford to spend a decade and a millions of dollars on research without some protection against reverse engineering by your competitors.
Netscape used the same strategy to gain market share. They gave it away for free until they built up a market. Then they started charging a registration fee to all non-educational users. After IE came along, they couldn't charge anything anymore. I guess everyone hear's hoping Linux will do the same thing to Windows, i.e. make the value in dollars of an OS approach $0.
You do get something when you buy a creative card and download the latest media player. You get the ability to play a DRM file. Everybody kept saying they'd pay for mp3's if they were made available for a low cost. This technology makes it possible while providing some protection against p2p sharing. If you never buy a DRM file, you won't even notice that your sound card doesn't output digital audio when you play it. If you don't like DRM songs, don't buy them.
"What we need to concentrate on is defeating the laws that will ban non DRM media players." What laws are those? That doesn't even make sense. Either a file uses DRM, and you need DRM player, or it doesn't, and you can use whatever's available. It's obvious what you really want is no legislation banning ripping software.
The article clearly states that the Creative card shuts down the DIGITAL output of the card. You can still loop back the analog signal.
It's bad enough when the person posting a story puts a biased spin on it in his commentary, but when slashdot allows biased stoires like this to qualify as "news", they need to start examining what they really want this site to be. Apparently, they don't want to present unbiased information, and let the slashdot community decide for themselves what it means through opinions and discussion, but instead prefer to push their agenda on slashdot community.
Your solution for the RIAA is like telling Walmart they should discourage shoplifting by handing out coupons for free stuff at McDonalds to people when they purchase products. Sure it may make a small dent in shoplifting, but it doesn't make shoplifting morally right. The added value to the purchasers at Walmart is ultimately paid by them anyway, assuming Walmart's making a profit. Therefore, they're paying extra to discourage shoplifters. Doesn't sound like a very fair solution to me.